Earlier this month, the IT impresario Tim O’Reilly convened a “Government 2.0” conference in Washington D.C. He’s planning a follow-up “Expo” for Spring 2010. Kudos to him and his team for sparking a dialogue about how to get more citizen/users involved in government. I especially liked the strict time limits he imposed on conference speakers –as tight as five minutes!
In connection with his entrepreneurial initiative, O’Reilly has been expounding on the idea of “government-as-a-platform.” He thinks governments should allow citizens and companies to build applications that make official data more user-friendly, much as The Weather Channel has done with what the NOAA collects and publishes. That way, citizens can choose from an array of public/private services, and let the best mashup win. Vivek Kundra, the federal government’s first Chief Information Officer, has been moving forward on something like this concept as part of the Obama Administration’s Open Government Directive, creating such sites Apps.gov, Data.gov, and the Federal IT Dashboard.
Andrea DiMaio, a VP and “distinguished analyst” at Gartner Research, pointed out that this is too simplistic to serve as an umbrella category for all that government does and should do with digital communication. Government may be a open, transparent, competitively rewarding platform in some circumstances. But in others, it must keep secrets and compel web users and other citizens to comply with the law or face penalties. And in still other circumstances the power flows in the reverse direction: citizens vote government officials out, and express disapproval in less formal but still influential ways.
This is a continuing dialogue well worth the attention and participation of advocates.
Michael, a political scientist, is the author of two books about the Internet and American politics. He currently serves as an Adjunct Professor at The Graudate School of Political Management at George Washington University.
View all previous posts »
720 Blog RSS Feed 
